"Tony Godshall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> My point remains that the maximum initial rate (however you define >> "initial" in a protocol as unreliable as TCP/IP) can and will be >> wrong in a large number of cases, especially on shared connections. > > Again, would an algorithm where the rate is re-measured periodically > and the initial-rate-error criticism were therefore addressed reduce > your objection to the patch?
Personally I don't see the value in attempting to find out the available bandwidth automatically. It seems too error prone, no matter how much heuristics you add into it. --limit-rate works because reading the data more slowly causes it to (eventually) also be sent more slowly. --limit-percentage is impossible to define in precise terms, there's just too much guessing.
